Author
Topic: Traditionalist Latins and Orthodoxy (Read 3359 times)

Of the few traditional Latin groups that broke from union with Rome, what is their realtionship with the Orthodox Churches?

Have any had dialogue with the Orthodox Churches, or is it that they are so extreme in their beliefs that there is no common ground with the Orthodox Church? Is there any common ground, or do both sides consider each other heretics? Is their position more like the ultra conservative Orthodox groups?

Logged

"If we truly think of Christ as our source of holiness, we shall refrain from anything wicked or impure in thought or act and thus show ourselves to be worthy bearers of his name. For the quality of holiness is shown not by what we say but by what w

depends upon whom you talk to. here is a brief rundown of the positions of the better known groups:

Priestly Society of St. Pius X (SSPX): considers the Orthodox definatly schismatic and prays for their conversion to the Catholic Church. Privatly however many avid SSPXers will admire the Orthodox.

Priestly Society of St. Piux V (SSPV): a sedevacantist (believing JPII to be a heretic and there to be no Pope since Pius XII) group. considers the ORthodox to be definatly schismatic and maybe heretical. privatly some will admire the Orthodox, particularly the more hardline groups such as ROAC, the GOC, and the TOC's.

Congregation of Mary Immaculate Queen (CMRI): a sedevacantist group. Their public opinion has been well known from recent events therein. however many of hte poor people duped into attending their chapels will also admire the traditionalist Orthodox.

the true Catholic Church (tCC): a group that has elected their own pope. has no real chapels and their only claim to notoriety is the alleged Pius XIII aka Fr. Pulvermacher.

There are infinitly others out there.

Most break away tradlats who are knowledgeable in the area agree that the NewCalandrists are rank heretics and actually worse than the Novus Ordites. However their private admiration for traditionalist ORthodox groups seldom spills over into their public ecclesiology and the powers that be in the SSPX etc. hate the Orthodox and consider them worse than Protestants since they are so close as to be confusing.

Hope this Helps.

Joe Zollarschief of sinners and prince of simpletons

Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.

Official relations between the two groups? In a word, nonexistent, owing to the exclusivity claims of each side. Understandable.

As I like to say, a rite is a package deal, and I think the core constituencies of both groups, born members of their faiths whose respective rites influence their whole lives (admirable), are so immersed in those rites that they really haven't got the time to look into other rites and churches. (In the cases of the Russian and Greek constituencies of the Orthodox churches and splinter groups, this holisticity - is there such a word? - is also bound up with ethnic identity.)

But ISTM that such Catholics who are aware of such things, like conservative Roman Catholics in general who are hip to the existence of the Christian East, are sympathetic to the Eastern Churches (as JoeZollars has said) and see them as an inspiration and working model of much of what they want. (The same faith but with a mystical bent all its own. Yes, I know that's not how the Orthodox see themselves!) This is possible owing to Catholic belief about these churches, including splinter groups outside Orthodoxy, being holy and apostolic - 'valid' bishops and Eucharist as well as a basic shared orthodoxy. Of course they see the other side as schismatic - there's the claim to be the one true church, almost mirroring Eastern Orthodoxy's teaching about itself.

But such also often (but not always) think, at the same time (!) that their rite is 'more Catholic' or 'universal'. Pr+Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Âªstantia ritus latini - Roman equals Catholic. (A stick with which Byzantine Catholics have been beaten for centuries.) Disowned as official policy but it affects policy and attitudes to this day.

My impression is most members of the Catholic splinter groups, like many RCs of all kinds, are only vaguely aware the Orthodox exist. (And probably don't know anything about the calendar war in the East.) As occasional poster Brendan03 puts it, Protestantism is their historic Other - other churches aren't on their radar.

Again, as for the Eastern side (including the ex-Orthodox splinter groups), I don't think their ethnic congregations know much at all about other churches and aren't particularly interested in them. Those members not born into it (namely converts) who do know about them usually are anything but sympathetic - more often they are obsessed the other way, vehemently anti as a number of ranting, embarrassing online writings attest.

One thing some 'trads' and the East share, on top of basic apostolic beliefs, is an emphasis on custom - organic development of rites and the authority of doing things as they always have been done. (Other trads, however, are different, using narrowly legalistic arguments based on their reading of canon law to defend their liturgical practices.)

y'all would be amazed at the number of trads I know who are aware of the calander war. Mainly they come to their conclusions from lurking here and elsewhere where such issues are discussed.

To put it plainly, most tradlats don't pay a whole lot of attention to anything to do with the Eastern Churches as they are fighting tooth and nail for their very existance. However, just about any tradlat Priest will tell you to go to the Tridentine Mass or the Eastern Rite Liturgies, but run the other way when you see the Novus (dis)Ordo Churches.

I have even been told by one Priest to go to the Eastern Liturgies if you can't go to the Latin Mass, "but make sure they haven't been modernised."

As Serge said however, most are at best only marginally aware of Orthodox's existance and if they are aware are seldom educated on the matter. TradLats fight a three front war:

1. The official RC Church which tells them tehy are "acting against the Magisterium" or "being Schismatic" simply for doing what has been for centuries.

2. The Prots who tell them they are going to hell for not becoming Protestant or "getting saved" as the heretics put it.

3. Against the secular culture who hate nothing more than the sight of a traditional Catholic Faith.

therefore they seldom have time or energy to educate themselves on the Eastern Churches. how very unfortunate.

Joe Zollars

Logged

These posts no longer represent my beliefs and I in no way endorse their contents.

Many Traditional breakaway Latins know almost nothing about the Orthodox East.

Some are nice though, in my city SSPX priests celebrate mass in the basement of a store (since it was forbidden to do so publicly). I sometimes go there, and they are nice people, very Nationalistic. And they said to me that they admired the way Orthodox have "mass" with all reverence and respect, etc.

In Belarus, when the SSPX priests established a mission, the government investigated with the Roman bishops and he talked very bad about them. Then they asked the Orthodox and they said "those are the true Catholics".

Why do traditionalist Catholic/Orthodox find women at the altar so scary? Please don't give me the "it's a staging ground for women priests" argument. Sure that's what many might wish, but slippery slope arguments never impress me. If there are good reasons not to ordain women, which don't apply to women serving as acolytes, then let women be altar servers but not acolytes. It's simple. I have never heard _one_ solid reason why women shouldn't serve at the altar, and I can't help but think that it stems from the idea that women are some how a polluting force in holy places. Which is completely contrary to the Gospel.

I'll let others fill in on the more religious answer to this question, and I'll ask the practical question.

Why would you want women at the altar when we have plenty of able and serving men? What is completely contrary to the Gospel? What would be the point of letting women serve? Equality? Where would the line be drawn?

I think we should focus more on getting people to go to church before we start letting everyone behind the iconostasis.

Why do traditionalist Catholic/Orthodox find women at the altar so scary? Please don't give me the "it's a staging ground for women priests" argument. Sure that's what many might wish, but slippery slope arguments never impress me. If there are good reasons not to ordain women, which don't apply to women serving as acolytes, then let women be altar servers but not acolytes. It's simple. I have never heard _one_ solid reason why women shouldn't serve at the altar, and I can't help but think that it stems from the idea that women are some how a polluting force in holy places. Which is completely contrary to the Gospel.

In Christ,

Edwin

Edwin, my friend, somehow your questions coming from an Episcopalian, are not surprising. They do, however, betray a lack of understanding about what Orthodoxy is. I do not feel a need to 'impress' you at all. You have your 'priestesses' in your church; please do not feel the need to berate Orthodox Tradition to justify your own beliefs. The concept is not 'scary' to us, just foreign and un-Orthodox. Quite frankly, at this time, the Church has no NEED to address this issue. When and if that time comes, each of us will heed our bishops' decisions. It's not our issue to debate.'Women' are held in the highest regard in the Orthodox Church and perhaps you might spend some time studying our reverence for the Theotokos as well as the many saints and martyrs who were women.Perhaps you might prefer to give us all the reasons why we SHOULD ordain women rather than ask us why we shouldn't. Historically the Orthodox Church has had "deaconesses"(ordained), a position that has fallen into disuse, but one whose need may rise again as more female adult converts need Baptism. This topic has been well discussed in past boards on this forum.

I think the point is, as Aristocles/Demetri pointed out, that things like deaconesses could be restored if there were a need, and perhaps they will. Where is the need for female altar servers? I am not opposed to them in principle but where is the argument to bring them in or bring deaconesses back?

If we just decided to restore them for the heck of it via a decree from whatever patriarch, it would cause more division than good. On the other hand, when St Nektarios ordained a deaconess (according to the ancient rite) it caused some criticism but did not bring about any schism.

As a follow-up to my post above I need to comment about 'scary' with a couple of personal anecdotes.1) A few years back my parents complained that we never celebrated Pascha with them. So that same year we traveled from Pittsburgh to my home parish in Norfolk, VA in time for Resurrection Matins. There is something soothing to going "home" - to the church one's grandparents helped build, where one served as an alterboy, where one went to "Greek School" (and the RCs think NUNS are tough; they've not been to "Greek School"), where one was married and one's children baptized, etc.. Anyway, the lights go out, in total darkness 700 faithful await the Light...imagine my SHOCK when the Holy Light was offered me by a,.. a.., a GIRL robed as a server! I thought I would faint. Later that morning at our traditional 3 AM Paschal feast my convert brother-in-law (former Southern Baptist) took me to task over my discomfort and iterated that the girls never entered the sanctuary and hence, what was the big deal?. Many here know I am, well, somewhat reactionary, but under closer inspection there really was nothing forbidding an Orthodox girl from this participation. Wasn't so 'scary' after all; pretty cool, actually.

2) Many moons ago (about 450 or so), I was serving as an alterboy during the visit of Archbishop Iakovos to our parsh. We Big'O girls and boys know how intimidating this can be. And that goes doubly so for an alterboy newly tonsured an acolyte. Time came for the good bishop's homily...he glanced over at we 8 alterboys, and then nodded toward me while catching the eye of our priest. Good Fr. Bithos then grabbed poor Demetri by the shoulders, took the bishop's staff from his hand, placed it in mine, and shoved me THROUGH the Royal Door to follow the bishop to his throne and hold it for him while he spoke. Folks, let me tell'ya, I was certain lightning was going to rip throught the roof of the nave and strike this poor alterboy - passing in FRONT of the alter and THROUGH the Royal Doors. Yes, 'SCARY', ya betta' believe it. I survived. Alas, I did discover that Greeks, even archbishops, DO need BOTH hands to speak.

Demetri

Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides

When I was baptized into the RCC in 1978, I first went to a novus ordo parish, left there shortly when I realized it really wasn't in any way the traditional RCC, and found a group called the ORCM (Orthodox Roman Catholic Movement). They disbanded, I think, in the 1990s with the death of their founder, Fr Francis E Fenton. Note: The word "orthodox" in their title meant simply "correct doctrine"; they had no connection to the Orthodox Church.)

They were tradlats and also sedevacantists, more or less. They distrusted the novus ordo church so much that they re-baptized me, assuming the NO church didn't do it properly (they did, actually, but I couldn't convince them of that.) They said it wasn't done properly because the NO church baptized and confirmed me at the same time, plus gave me Holy Communion (as the Eastern church does it). After I joined the ORCM, I was later confirmed (again?) by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.

« Last Edit: July 02, 2011, 08:36:52 PM by Xenia1918 »

Logged

"O God, enlarge within us the sense of fellowship with all living things, our brothers the animals to whom Thou gavest the earth as their home in common with us..." (from the Prayer of St Basil the Great)

I only recently learned that Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunication of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the bishops he ordained at Econe in 1988 (I was away from the Traditional RCC for a long time, which is why I just now found out!)

Does anyone here who may be Trad RC know how things stand right now with the SSPX/other Trad RC groups, and Rome? Is there any hope of Rome in its entirety going back to Tradition?

Logged

"O God, enlarge within us the sense of fellowship with all living things, our brothers the animals to whom Thou gavest the earth as their home in common with us..." (from the Prayer of St Basil the Great)

Would these concerns not be better addressed at a Catholic forum as although I and some other posters can give you some information we are a minority here and on a purely Catholic forum you would be likely to get a far more diverse range of views and greater information.

Logged

And then my heart hath told me:These will pass,Will pass and change, will die and be no more,Things bright and green, things young and happy;And I have gone upon my waySorrowful.

I only recently learned that Pope Benedict XVI lifted the excommunication of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and the bishops he ordained at Econe in 1988 (I was away from the Traditional RCC for a long time, which is why I just now found out!)

Does anyone here who may be Trad RC know how things stand right now with the SSPX/other Trad RC groups, and Rome?

Fr. Z said that Catholics can fulfill their Sunday Obligation by attending an SSPX mass, but I can't say for certain if that's correct.